Posted on 07/24/2007 7:02:53 AM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
NYT: Billing records show Fred did lobby for abortion group; Update: Pro-Fred blogger apologizes to LA Times
posted at 8:44 am on July 19, 2007 by Allahpundit
(Allahpundit [also known as Allah] is a blogger best known as the author for defunct blog Allah Is in the House, a satirical political blog existing 2003-2005, and as an active contributor to Michelle Malkin's Hot Air.)
Patterico beat me to the punch. What on earth was Mark Corallo thinking when he told the LA Times no way nuh uh never happened when he didn’t know that for a fact? Did the campaign even think to check the billing records? If not, or if they couldn’t, then why not just spin it in a more fact-friendly way from the outset? E.g., "He didn’t really want to lobby for them but he was new at the firm and felt obliged to do whatever they asked at first" or "His profound moral opposition to abortion didn’t calcify until he reached the Senate, as his voting record bears out." Now, instead, they look like liars. Flashback:
Corallo, the spokesman for Thompson, was asked Friday about the board minutes and the five people who said they recalled Thompson accepting the lobbying assignment. He responded in an e-mail, saying that Thompson "may have been consulted by one of [his] firm’s partners who represented this group in 1991."
Corallo said it was "not unusual for one lawyer on one side of an issue to be asked to give advice to colleagues for clients who engage in conduct or activities with which they personally disagree."
And now compare today’s Times:
According to records from Arent Fox, the law firm based in Washington where Mr. Thompson worked part-time from 1991 to 1994, he charged the organization, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, about $5,000 for work he did in 1991 and 1992. The records show that Mr. Thompson, a probable Republican candidate for president in 2008, spent much of that time in telephone conferences with the president of the group, and on three occasions he reported lobbying administration officials on its behalf...
The billing records from Arent Fox show that Mr. Thompson, who charged about $250 an hour, spoke 22 times with Judith DeSarno, who was then president of the family planning group. In addition, he lobbied "administration officials" for a total of 3.3 hours, the records show, although they do not specify which officials he met with or what was said.
Patterico notes that Fred himself was careful all along to use the "lawyers don’t always agree with their clients" defense — which is weak in the context of an issue as morally important to the base as this one but beats lying, at least — and Corallo backed off his earlier blanket denial a few days after the LAT story broke, telling Politico, "He has no recollection of doing any work for this group. And since he was of counsel and not a member of the firm, it was not unusual for the firm’s partners to trot their clients in to meet him, get his views and even some advice." (As Patterico notes, incredulously, they trotted people in for 19 hours?) But meanwhile, a meaningless story that should have been defused the first day suddenly has oxygen again 11 days later. And his third-tier opponents, at least, are already taking advantage.
Eh, I doubt it’ll matter. Pro-lifers have nowhere else to go realistically among the top candidates. Still, as Patterico says, "To me, the controversy over Fred Thompson’s alleged lobbying for an abortion rights group has little to do with his views on abortion, and more to do with his honesty." Exit question: Does it? Or does it prove what his aides have been saying about the campaign not being ready for primetime yet, which is why they need to wait a while longer to declare? (Shortly after Labor Day, according to the Times.)
Update: Fred 29, Rudy 28.
Update: Nice job here by Joe Carter. He’s gone and violated the 12th Commandment — on the "Blogs For Fred" site, no less!
I claimed that the LAT article was a "hit piece", when the basic premise was later confirmed to be true. I implied that that the people from NFPRHA might be lying, only to find that their central claim – that Thompson lobbied for the group – was largely true. I may not agree with their motives, but it was wrong of me to unfairly malign the LAT and the NFPRHA leaders. I owe them both an apology.
I don’t like being wrong. I don’t like having to apologize to abortion advocates. And I really don’t like finding I put my own integrity in question."
I was wrong, and I owe you an apology.
Who else do we support? Romney, who changed his mind only recently, and has no governmental acts to show for it? Or Rudy, who openly supports free and easy abortion?
Or maybe you still think that the under-five-percenters are still going to emerge at the top of the heap?
Well, Fred says he’s suprised people ever thought he was pro-choice. Gee Fred, as National Review has noted, it’s because you WERE pro choice. Even today, he’s as clear as mud on the subject.
Terrible move by Fast Freddie.
Hit piece by a bunch of Ron Paul Wackos. These people never give up. They’re disgusting.
He lied to the American People.
He lied.
That's the point.
Or maybe you still think that the under-five-percenters are still going to emerge at the top of the heap?
I support Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter, in that order. At least they are all smart, honorable, genuine Conservatives who are TRUSTWORTHY.
I believed Fred Thompson on this story. I believed him.
And I was wrong.
It’s not the lobbying that troubles me as much as the lie. Agreed.
Hint to all:
If you’re coming on this thread to make excuses for Fred, you’re just going to make yourself look like an idiot.
Honesty is a key critical element for POTUS. ALL the top tier GOP candidates are distasteful to me. Of the rest I favor Hunter the most, but he has an ice cubes chance in hell.
Even though Paul’s foreign policy is nutso, I respect the man because of his consistency and honesty within his belief system.
It’s hard to respect a liar. I was starting to lean as favorable to FDT but this makes it really rough. I’m sure I’m not the only one.
It’s now official for me, I dislike all the Republican Candidates.
If you are a baby killer group, you would like someone to speak to the WH about positions. I guess we have forgotten about Barbara Bush’s stand on abortion. Lawyers make their living by representing people, whether on a fact finding service or advocacy. There is a big difference. I’m sure the Dum’s told them don’t worry, ole GHWBush has pissed off so many people with his Tax hike , that the Repubs don’t have a snowballs chance in hell of winning. And we got Bubba BJ Clinton.
The Abortion lobbying thing doesn’t bother me as much as his votes on some things.
In any case I just see him as repackaged same ole same ole.
“Hit piece by a bunch of Ron Paul Wackos. These people never give up. They’re disgusting.”
It’s not a hit piece when it’s true.
Er, no.
This Article is from Michelle Malkin's website.
Hardly a "Ron Paul wacko".
Which would be why Fred responded by saying that “he didn’t recall” lobbying in favor of abortion instead of saying that he didn’t .
I wonder if Newt knew this was coming, and factored it into his announcement that he might run the other day.
Excuse me - isn’t this being blown a trifle out of proportion? 20 freaking hours for pete’s sake! 16 years ago! I am inclined to cut Fred a little slack when he says he has no recollection of it. I’d be hard put to remember something that I did last year that I only spent 20 hours on, let alone 16 years ago! If we were talking several hundred hours, then I would question Fred’s honesty, but 20 freakin’ hours! Give me a break!
You can throw the first rock when you tell everyone what YOU were working on at work, 14 years ago. Be specific and don't LIE or guess.
“Hit piece by a bunch of Ron Paul Wackos. These people never give up. They’re disgusting.”
Since when is Michelle Malkin a Paulistinian??!!
The more I read your post, the more I think you’re the whacko.
Dang is there ANYONE out there not for abortion???
But not the White House.
As always, JMHO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.